Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
28 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Board Game Design » Board Game Design

Subject: How to come up with a good tie breaking system rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Dimitri Sirenko
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
Hey guys
I am trying to figure out a good system to break a tie between 2 or more players in my game.

The game goes on until all the treasures have been acquired. Once the last treasure is acquired, players count their victory points. There are 3 ways to score.
1. Treasure rarity - each treasure gives you a base amount of points based on its rarity
2. Treasure set - when you collect 3 treasures of the same color you get bonus 5 victory points and if you collect 6 treasures of the same color you get 15 bonus points
3. Completing Challenges - challenge cads are acquired by the first player to complete the unique set of conditions described on the challenge card.

Now, in the last 4 months of designing this game we have accepted the fact that there is a small probability that people can tie their scores at the end and win. From numerous playtests we have seen that happen a few times.

We didnt think it was a big deal mainly due to our personalities, although we play competitively, not being number one and sharing a victory spot with someone else didn't bother us much.

However, just recently we playtested with a good friend of mine who is also a game designer and he pointed out that given the theme of the game and how competitive it is, he felt that a lot of people who do care a lot about being the sole winner will be pissed off or have a negative experience with the game if the tie occurs. This got us thinking that maybe he is right. while there are other really good games that are competitive and use point system like 7 Wonders where you CAN tie with someone, we felt that maybe for our game it is more important to figure out how to determine one sole winner

thematically my game is about determining the next grand master of a thieves guild. So even going by the theme it makes more sense to somewhoe determine the only winner.

We have disccused the following ideas but so far most of them are kind of problematic or "dirty" and complicated design.

1. Completely random draw
pros
- solves the problem
- very quick
- doesn't break any existing mechanics
- simple
cons
- randomly choosing a winner out of otherwise 2 or more people who did eually good in my opinion can piss people off even more if there was no tie breaker
- seems rather lazy and thoughtless compared to a lot of other mechanics of our game

2. Count up treasure or challenge card amount (or both)
pros
- not random.
- Actually provides a legit way of deciding who gets to break a tie.
cons
- while counting up the actual treasure cards can be a good extra layer to try and determine the sole winner it does not seem fair. Just because somebody got the same amount of victory point by having more treasures of lower rarity does not mean they are better than someone with a more streamlined strategy. Therefore this type of system does not seem fair at all
- this system also is not a sure tie breaker as there will still be a small probability that two people can get same amount of points but also possess the same amount of treasure and challenge cards. Therefore this system is not perfect and i feel that a tie breaking system must work 100% of the time

3. Extra round.
for this extra round we would have a tie breaker treasure that would never be in the treasure deck. Then, when two or more players get the same amount of points they draw 5 new action cards each and this treasure is pulled out of the box and played for just like all the other ones. Now we like this option the most but there are complications that we havent been able to solve yet.

- Whoever gets this treasure wins no matter what.
this option is great however it breaks the balance and design of one of our special action cards. This special action allows players to steal treasures from each other's possession. If i am a player that draw the 5 cards in this extra round and i end up with 1 or 2 of those Steal Treasure special action cards then I am screwed by luck since even if i use those cards to steal treasures from my opponent(s) that does absolutely nothing for me but leave me with 2 cards less than my opponent to fight for the tie breaker treasure.

- This tie breaking treasure gives a large amount of points
this would basically mean that this treasure most likely will allow someone to win by counting the points towards their total. In this scenario Steal Treasure special action cards will not be broken. You will be able to use them and potentially win the tie breaker even if you don't acquire this last treasure. However, the broken part of the design in this case comes back to the same idea of this mechanic not being a true 100% tie breaker. There is a low chance that if im playing against another person and he gets this treasure and i steal 1 or 2 of his existing treasres, that we will end up at same score again.
Now we thought of how to solve this situation. The solution is to make the victory points someone gets from this tie breaker treasure decimal. So for example, all treasure in this game give 2,3 or 5 points, all sets give either 5 or 15, and all challenges range from 2-4. Now if this last treasure was something like 8.5 then there is always going to be a winner and you can never get another tie. BUT, the problem is that we feel that putting such weird number as 8.5 is really weird and inconsistent with the rest of the game. Are we overthinking it? or do you guys think this is the solution?


As you can see we are trying to break our brains trying to solve this problem. So I have 3 questions

1. Would you agree with my designer friend that we would definitely need a tie breaker mechanic in such competitive game as ours? Or are we looking too much at personal preferences at this point?

2. Is our solution with decimal number too weird or is it in our heads? Should we just go with that solution?

3. Are there any other ideas any of you guys could give me?


Thanks in advance!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex
Germany
Attendorn
flag msg tools
mb
Maybe, in case of a tie, make only those treasure count which the respective players have acquired in the final round, to determine the winner?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul
United Kingdom
Manchester
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Out of the tied players, the one with the rarest treasure wins. If it's still a tie, go to the next one, etc.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Brettell
Australia
South Turramurra
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think having a tie-breaker system is a must. Definitely don't want a completely random solution - that makes no sense whatsoever.

I don't really like the idea of a single treasure breaking ties - there's a good chance it will end up being randomly assigned, for instance if it comes up early one player may acquire it without any particular interest in the tie-breakiness, and so through luck, happen to win.

I think it's okay to have more than one tie-breaker. As the game draws to a close, and people can see there might be a tie, they can give some thought to the tie-breaker situations, so adjust their strategy. Things like 'whoever has the most sets of treasures', or 'whoever has the most red, then blue, then green treasures'.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maarten D. de Jong
Netherlands
Zaandam
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
3CreativeMinds wrote:
1. Would you agree with my designer friend that we would definitely need a tie breaker mechanic in such competitive game as ours? Or are we looking too much at personal preferences at this point?

I've never understood the need for excessive tie-breaking. Why not accept as fact that games do not always support sufficient granularity to distinguish between two very close winners, and that therefore matters are simply too close to call? Most people will attribute very little meaning to obscure tie breaker rules in the first place, and accept matters as a cosmetic nicety at best in order to crown someone the winner.

So no: I disagree with your friend. Especially when it's subject considerations which provide the impetus for hammering a mechanism in place. There will always be gnarly spots where the mechanisms don't really 'fit in' with the subject they're representing, but need to be there all the same because the game necessitates their presence. Overall your suggestions paint a picture of nasty, kludgy fixes which harm the game more than that it solves an actual problem. Drop them, and save the tie breaking issues for the next game... provided they are an actual issue there.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael J
United States
Folsom
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like tie breakers, but they have to be integral to the game as a whole and should not favor one strategy over another. Ideally, the tie breaker is based on the most important theme of the game. For example, whoever explores the most in an exploration game, or, whoever has the highest end-of-turn income in an economic game. It shouldn't be arbitrary, or require players to do gamey things to earn.

Something I don't quote see enough is a final "battle" between tied players in games where random tie breakers are arbitrary anyway.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The Count
United States
Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mjacobsca wrote:
I like tie breakers, but they have to be integral to the game as a whole and should not favor one strategy over another. Ideally, the tie breaker is based on the most important theme of the game. For example, whoever explores the most in an exploration game, or, whoever has the highest end-of-turn income in an economic game. It shouldn't be arbitrary, or require players to do gamey things to earn.

Something I don't quote see enough is a final "battle" between tied players in games where random tie breakers are arbitrary anyway.
Ties are fine....you should watch more Soccer Mike...or play more Cosmic Encounter
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mauricio Montoya
Colombia
Medellín
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Use a main tie breaker factor, and maybe secondary one, but most games I've played just declare at that point that both players are winners (it's an incentive to play again and let actual skill decide, not an obscure third rule)

Tie breaker order in most games tends to depend on the difficulty in acquiring the item/resource that's being used, and its importance during the game. Dunno about your specific game mechanics, whether those rare items are just randomly drawn and it's just a matter of luck if you get more or less rare stuff, or if you actually have to go thru some extra steps or pay increased costs to get the rare items. If it's the latter case, then the player with the most rare items could be declared the winner, because he actually played the hardest game to get to the same score.

Then for the secondary tie breaker you can use another remaining resource or unused money, for example.

The important thing is that those tie-breaking conditions are not just things that can happen at random (you just drey more rare item cards than me) but things that actually take some effort to get, so the losing player feels it was fair and the other player deserved it, otherwise it's effectively the same as throwing a die and letting pure chance decide who was the winner.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Ward
Japan
Matsumoto
Nagano
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Random tie breaker solution is, like you said, lazy and meaning less.
I usually go with turn order, since that is usually there in a game.
You can gauge if the last player or the first player has an advantage, and then set the tie breaker accordingly for fairness... or make it more exciting and award the win to the player who ended the game.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt D
United States
Peachtree corners
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since you currently reward players for most treasures and most of each set, what about the tie breaker being total number of different sets represented, and if tied on THAT, "tied players share in the win."

Unless I have misread, you don't have any kind of bonus for diversifying. Now, as someone else pointed out, you may want to avoid a tie-break that favors one strategy over another, and this one would in a way favor someone who want for raw numbers and didn't otherwise bother with set collection. BUT...you can mitigate that potentially (if we're talking enough treasures) by saying the most number of different sets of which the player has more than one. But that only works in a game where one would expect each player to have at least two of one or multiple sets. I don't know how many treasures a player should end up with, or how many different sets there are.

I like a tie-breaker that finds a way to reward something outside of what the victory points are, because if the tie-breaker is one of those, then it really just makes that a super award because it is increasing the benefit of one PARTICULAR component of the victory total.

Just a thought.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Wilczewski
United States
Folsom
California
flag msg tools
badge
Someone on the internet is wrong!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
droberts441 wrote:
mjacobsca wrote:
I like tie breakers, but they have to be integral to the game as a whole and should not favor one strategy over another. Ideally, the tie breaker is based on the most important theme of the game. For example, whoever explores the most in an exploration game, or, whoever has the highest end-of-turn income in an economic game. It shouldn't be arbitrary, or require players to do gamey things to earn.

Something I don't quote see enough is a final "battle" between tied players in games where random tie breakers are arbitrary anyway.
Ties are fine....you should watch more Soccer Mike...or play more Cosmic Encounter

I'd love to see a tie-breaker after the game is over - like for Ginkgopolis "Among tied players, whoever can hug a tree fastest and get back to their seat wins the tie"
Dungeon Petz "Whoever is willing to clean the host's catbox wins the tie"
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Jackson
United States
Greensboro
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
What is the sound of one card shuffling?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Maybe the tie goes to the player with the least number of treasures, with most challenge cards as the second tie breaker
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The Count
United States
Sacramento
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
alenen wrote:
droberts441 wrote:
mjacobsca wrote:
I like tie breakers, but they have to be integral to the game as a whole and should not favor one strategy over another. Ideally, the tie breaker is based on the most important theme of the game. For example, whoever explores the most in an exploration game, or, whoever has the highest end-of-turn income in an economic game. It shouldn't be arbitrary, or require players to do gamey things to earn.

Something I don't quote see enough is a final "battle" between tied players in games where random tie breakers are arbitrary anyway.
Ties are fine....you should watch more Soccer Mike...or play more Cosmic Encounter

I'd love to see a tie-breaker after the game is over - like for Ginkgopolis "Among tied players, whoever can hug a tree fastest and get back to their seat wins the tie"
Dungeon Petz "Whoever is willing to clean the host's catbox wins the tie"
Do you have a cat Chris? I think we need to make sure we only play Dungeon Petz at your house from now on.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JT Schiavo
United States
Frederick
MD
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Thematically speaking, I think a tie-breaker is needed. If I were part of a thieves' guild and was appointing a grand master, and both candidates returned with the same value in goods, I'd probably pick the most impressive thief.

In game, there are two ways that I would choose impressiveness.

a) Least treasures. If you got the same value with less cards, you probably stole better stuff, which is more impressive. But as mentioned above, this could still lead to ties.

b) Showing off with challenges. Rather than going for "most challenges" I think a good way to approach this is to give each challenge a unique challenge rating based on how hard it is to complete. If you have 15 challenge cards in the game, number each 1-15 and the highest completed challenge breaks the tie. Since challenges are directly competed for and would seem to take some planning to earn, this seems like a more fair solution.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Aaron Wan
Sweden
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
i suppose i'd try to find something that'd fit with your theme. if the theme is about being the next grandmaster of a thieves guild, how would they normally do it? i think they'd normally have a final face-off showdown to determine, once and for all.

maybe a fight to the death IS necessary (and doable with in-game mechanics, without needing to add more stuff). not sure if theres combat here.

perhaps there are other non-treasures out there, that dont count towards any points, but they DO count towards tie-breaking - you know, that amazing thief that managed to nick all that loot AND gather a bunch of local lords and powers-that-be's cooperation/blackmailed or whatever. That'd introduce another level of gameplay, where a player'd think that they might be winning, but another guy is also doing well, so might you take that magistrate card instead of that treasure? less points, but you'd win the tiebreaker.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dimitri Sirenko
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
interesting points guys thanks a lot!

last night i came up with another variation for tie breaker treasure idea. Let me know what you think of this.

1. Player 1 and Player 2 have counted the points and are sharing same amount.
2. The tie breaker treasure gets taken out of the box and is placed on the table.
3. Each player draws brand new 10 action cards and picks 5 for the final battle out of the 10 like a strategy draft mechanic(the reason im doing this is in case they get the Steal Treasure cards they can easily choose other cards that will actually aid them in the battle)
Player 1 and Player 2 then fight for the treasure and whoever gets it is the sole winner.

so of course there is still some randomness in terms of drafting from randomly drawn 10 cards but that pretty much how the rest of the game plays where obviously randomly drawn action cards affect how well you will do to a certain extent. So at least this way we are not introducing more randomness than already exists in the current design structure of the game
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt D
United States
Peachtree corners
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
3CreativeMinds wrote:

last night i came up with another variation for tie breaker treasure idea. Let me know what you think of this.

1. Player 1 and Player 2 have counted the points and are sharing same amount.
2. The tie breaker treasure gets taken out of the box and is placed on the table.
3. Each player draws...


I'd be leery of a tie breaker that extends the game beyond a random draw or coin flip* for the tied players. If I'm in a four player game and not one of the two tied players, I'm probably ready to move onto the next game and don't want to sit and watch two players play out a round for 5 mins or more to determine who won.

* I don't think a random draw or a coin flip are any good either. Unsatisfying for those that are tied. Just not as objectionable to those that aren't.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JT Schiavo
United States
Frederick
MD
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
3CreativeMinds wrote:
interesting points guys thanks a lot!

last night i came up with another variation for tie breaker treasure idea. Let me know what you think of this.

1. Player 1 and Player 2 have counted the points and are sharing same amount.
2. The tie breaker treasure gets taken out of the box and is placed on the table.
3. Each player draws brand new 10 action cards and picks 5 for the final battle out of the 10 like a strategy draft mechanic(the reason im doing this is in case they get the Steal Treasure cards they can easily choose other cards that will actually aid them in the battle)
Player 1 and Player 2 then fight for the treasure and whoever gets it is the sole winner.

so of course there is still some randomness in terms of drafting from randomly drawn 10 cards but that pretty much how the rest of the game plays where obviously randomly drawn action cards affect how well you will do to a certain extent. So at least this way we are not introducing more randomness than already exists in the current design structure of the game


As Matt also mentioned above me, this is essentially player elimination. For some, this is okay. For others, this is anathema.

I think your better approach is to find something else that is already a part of the game which you want to bolster. Maybe a certain risky strategy needs more reinforcement, or some aspect of the game isn't fully fleshed out yet.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dimitri Sirenko
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
hestiansun wrote:
3CreativeMinds wrote:

last night i came up with another variation for tie breaker treasure idea. Let me know what you think of this.

1. Player 1 and Player 2 have counted the points and are sharing same amount.
2. The tie breaker treasure gets taken out of the box and is placed on the table.
3. Each player draws...


I'd be leery of a tie breaker that extends the game beyond a random draw or coin flip* for the tied players. If I'm in a four player game and not one of the two tied players, I'm probably ready to move onto the next game and don't want to sit and watch two players play out a round for 5 mins or more to determine who won.

* I don't think a random draw or a coin flip are any good either. Unsatisfying for those that are tied. Just not as objectionable to those that aren't.


i see your point. Generally though each round takes about 2-3 minutes with 3-5 players. So with just two players it would take 2 minutes at most. But lets give it a few more minutes for the card drafting and preparation so i think maximum time it would take is about 4-5 minutes. Is that actually such a big deal breaker for those who didn't win considering how little time it will take as well as the fact that it might be an exciting thing to look at to see who wins as well as the fact that it won't happen that often (its not like ties happen every time at the end of the game)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Maarten D. de Jong
Netherlands
Zaandam
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
3CreativeMinds wrote:
Is that actually such a big deal breaker for those who didn't win considering how little time it will take as well as the fact that it might be an exciting thing to look at to see who wins as well as the fact that it won't happen that often (its not like ties happen every time at the end of the game)

You haven't answered the most important question: Why do you want a tie-breaker in the first place? And until that is answered, arguing about a few minutes here or there makes little sense.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dimitri Sirenko
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
cymric wrote:
3CreativeMinds wrote:
Is that actually such a big deal breaker for those who didn't win considering how little time it will take as well as the fact that it might be an exciting thing to look at to see who wins as well as the fact that it won't happen that often (its not like ties happen every time at the end of the game)

You haven't answered the most important question: Why do you want a tie-breaker in the first place? And until that is answered, arguing about a few minutes here or there makes little sense.



well i guess if my friend never mentioned this point to me id never even include a tie breaker. It is hard for me to judge myself whether having no tie breaker in a highly competitive game would actually turn those competitive players off to a point of not playing this game ever again. The reason it is hard for me to judge is that I have not seen issues with this from playtesting. Mind you, i don't really know if there were ties in my external playtesting sessions. My friend's point is basically that he has seen first hand how in competitive games that do not have a tie breaker, players do really want to be the sole winner really hate the idea of sharing the first place with someone else. To me personally that does not matter at all. Same with my group of friends that play board games with me all the time. None of them care enough to get pissed off about that. But again what made me think of this more in depth is the fact that my friend who is also a game designer told me that there are a lot of people that would care about that aspect. At first we had a debate whether that is true or not but then i realized that i can't really debate about that since i have not seen that happen and he has. I guess afterall, the game story is about thieves trying to outdo each other for a grand prize of being a new grandmaster of the guild. So thematically it also makes a lot of sense to have only one sole winner and leader of the guild.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dimitri Sirenko
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
cymric wrote:
3CreativeMinds wrote:
Is that actually such a big deal breaker for those who didn't win considering how little time it will take as well as the fact that it might be an exciting thing to look at to see who wins as well as the fact that it won't happen that often (its not like ties happen every time at the end of the game)

You haven't answered the most important question: Why do you want a tie-breaker in the first place? And until that is answered, arguing about a few minutes here or there makes little sense.


ohh and it guess my friend's other point was that my game plays a little bit like Yu Gi Oh in terms of competitive fast nature. So his point was that because it is like that, it would need to have a definite winner otherwise more hardcore players will not have much fun with it
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Kitching
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
3CreativeMinds wrote:
Is that actually such a big deal breaker for those who didn't win considering how little time it will take as well as the fact that it might be an exciting thing to look at to see who wins as well as the fact that it won't happen that often (its not like ties happen every time at the end of the game)


No, it's not a deal breaker, but then I would never play the tie breaker round, so please add it in as an optional rule.

Personally, I don't have a problem with ties but I do have a problem with extending a finished game because it won't just take a couple of minutes.

There should already be enough information to choose a winner in the end game state - rank the victory conditions, rank the challenges, rank the treasures, use last turn order of play (or reverse order, whichever is the weakest position or needed the highest bid).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dimitri Sirenko
Canada
Vancouver
BC
flag msg tools
Postmark wrote:
3CreativeMinds wrote:
Is that actually such a big deal breaker for those who didn't win considering how little time it will take as well as the fact that it might be an exciting thing to look at to see who wins as well as the fact that it won't happen that often (its not like ties happen every time at the end of the game)


No, it's not a deal breaker, but then I would never play the tie breaker round, so please add it in as an optional rule.

Personally, I don't have a problem with ties but I do have a problem with extending a finished game because it won't just take a couple of minutes.

There should already be enough information to choose a winner in the end game state - rank the victory conditions, rank the challenges, rank the treasures, use last turn order of play (or reverse order, whichever is the weakest position or needed the highest bid).


thats a good point. Yeah maybe if i can come up with a system that doesn't require additional time spent on playing more rounds but also can definitely determine 1 sole winner, then it would be the best.

or maybe if that system is not perfect and has a slight chance of creating another draw then i could state in the rules that it is truly a draw and the players will both become the grand masters.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I would expect a tie breaker and be a bit disappointed if there wasn't one, but it wouldn't sour me on a game entirely.

I would prefer no tiebreaker to a random tiebreaker or one that required any significant extra play.

Secondary resources is a very good tiebreaker. It's quite satisfying to break a tie with "Well we got the same number of points, but I had 4 cards and 3 coins left over to get more treasures with so I did better" I don't know if your game features any secondary resources.

Using it to reward the harder strategy also seems reasonable. Your game probably isn't tightly balanced enough that "get as many treasures as possible" and "get the highest value treasures possible" are strategies that are producing the same win rate. Having "wins ties" as a boost applied to whichever approach is less effective is a possible item in your balancing toolkit.

Also if you want to go with the decimal solution, but decimals bother you just multiply everything by two. Now treasures give 4, 6 or 10, sets give 10 or 30 and challenges give 4, 6 or 8 and your special treasure gives 17. By virtue of being the only odd number it avoids a tie regardless of the other scoring involved. I wouldn't recommend this style of solution though - do you have a plan for what happens if the tiebreaker treasure is in the hands of a third player who's not tied for first place?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.